Calls for reviews naive and half-baked

The phone hacking scandal that has swamped Rupert Murdoch’s
News Corp
in recent weeks has revealed some appalling practices and most people share Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s reaction of shock and disgust.

The Murdoch media empire is being whipped and humiliated for the actions of staff at some of its British newspapers. Drastic measures such as closing News of the World and ditching the company’s long-held ambition to own all of British pay television company BSkyB are only the start of the price News Corp will pay.

The residue of the mountains of mud that are being thrown at News Corp will stick for years. But suggesting the hacking scandal should lead to a wide-ranging review of media ownership and regulation rules in Australia is a very long bow to draw.

Gillard’s comments on Thursday that the federal government’s convergence media review – which, among other things, is looking at how the rise of the internet has affected Australia’s antiquated media laws – could somehow be extended to cover the print medium and media practices and standards in general were a half-baked response to a scandal that is generating an inordinate amount of media coverage (proving, again, the media industry’s obsession with reporting on itself).

Never mind that there is no evidence phone hacking is used by Australian newspapers: journalists are an easy target for politicians and Murdoch-bashing is the new black.

But if Gillard’s comments were puzzling, Greens leader Bob Brown’s utterances were bizarre and disturbing in their naivety.

Never one to miss a media moment, Brown declared his party would push for a full Senate or independent inquiry into media ownership and regulation in Australia.

Do people want such an inquiry? Who cares. Climbing on his moral high horse, Brown said News Corp’s dominance of the local print media sector (it accounts for about 70 per cent of all newspapers sold here) required – no, demanded – an inquiry to examine media ownership concentration, the need to curb foreign ownership of media companies, and if there should be new “fit and proper" character tests for the owners of media companies.

Related Quotes

Company Profile

He also raised the idea of bringing in licensing laws for newspapers, setting up an independent body to enforce a journalists’ code of conduct, and giving the Australian Communications and Media Authority “some oversight of newspapers".

The laundry list of media “reforms" were delivered with a straight face. Brown knows research shows many people have the same respect for journalists as they do for used-car salesmen and real estate agents. Like Gillard, he also knows News Corp’s deepening woes have made the media a soft target.

The list of areas the proposed inquiry would cover was, to be frank, silly. Take the idea of restricting foreign ownership of media companies. Yes, the government could stop foreigners controlling, say, News Corp’s Australian newspapers or Seven West Media’s television and magazine divisions.

But, as News Corp’s local newspaper boss, John Hartigan, points out, how would it police global media businesses such as Google, Facebook and Twitter? Would they be exempt because their core products emanate from overseas?

Brown and others are half-right when they say media ownership in Australia is highly concentrated. A handful of companies own old media such as newspapers, TV and radio stations. But the rise of the internet has increased – and will continue to increase – the number of media voices.

No one is condoning the illegal activities at News Corp’s British newspaper division. No one is saying all Australian journalists are angels.

But the self-serving, predictable calls for media industry inquiries are simply designed to score political points. If Gillard and Brown have serious concerns about the structure and conduct of Australian media companies, they should suggest some serious solutions.